ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
Safety and Feasibility of Transcaval Access for the Delivery of Impella Microaxial Flow Pump.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transcaval Access for Impella Placement: A Viable Alternative in Appropriate Patients.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transcaval access (TCA) may enable percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) with reduced risk of vascular complications in cardiogenic shock patients needing mechanical support. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients who underwent TCA placement of an Impella 5.0 (Abiomed) from June 2015 to March 2023. Data on demographic characteristics, clinical, procedural variables, and in-hospital outcomes were collected. Results: Seventy-two patients (mean age, 58.2 years; 66.7% men) were included. Twenty-eight patients had nonischemic cardiomyopathy and 43 had ischemic cardiomyopathy, with a baseline left ventricular ejection fraction of 23.5% ± 14.2%. Most patients (90.3%) were in categories C to E of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) classification for cardiogenic shock. TCA and MCS delivery were successful in all cases. Forty-two patients survived to explant device and TCA sheath, with successful explant in 36 using nitinol occluders; 7 needed a covered stent due to underlying right ventricular dysfunction to avoid right ventricular failure. Overall, in-hospital survival was 44.4%, with 43.8% in the nonischemic group and 56.2% in the ischemic group. Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding >1 occurred in 13.9%. No vascular complications from the access site were observed. During hospitalization, 16.7% had ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation and 5.6% had pulseless electrical activity postimplantation. Acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis occurred in 15.3%, and 4.2% had a stroke. The average length of stay was 19.9 days (IQR, 3-28.25). Conclusions: Transcaval access for Impella 5.0 is safe and feasible in experienced hands for patients needing advanced MCS due to inadequate peripheral arterial access or insufficient support from conventional devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.